o 


^OFCAIIFO/?^ 


^OFCAllFOfti^ 


■^/saaAiNnawv        >&Aavji8iH^'^      ^<?AavaaiH^'^ 


IRARYQ^ 


.^      ^>MllBRARYQr^ 


^^WELl^ilVER%       ^lOSANCEl^ 


ivjjo"^     %Oi\mi^^       <riiJONvsoi^      ^/^a3AiNn-3WV^ 


MIFO%        .^OFCAIIFO%  .  ^\\E  I'NIVERS/a 

ll    S     S    J  I  (^2^7  wig  fun^piJfN)TO     § 

^aaivi^"^      ^^AavaaiH'v^        <rii30N\soi^''      "v/^ajAiNnmv 


»iiVERy//, 


o 


f 

NVSOl^ 


^lOSvVNCElfj^ 


^IVER%       ^lOSANCElij: 


"^AaaAINHJWv 


^^lLIBRARYQ(^       ^UIBRARYQ^ 


%aaAiNn-3v\v       ^<jojiiv3jo>'     ^^Qi\mi'ii^ 


^QFCALIFOff^ 


^OFCAllFOff^ 


R'^RYQ'u..  //^^-^'^"^^lY^^c^  M^^V^;^'5L'^^'^^^'^     ^^nV°i^^^^% 


III 


IVER%       ^lOSANCElfj^ 


'^<!/0JllV3JO>' 


.S;OFCAllF0/?4^ 

C3 

> 


;A;OFCAl!F0/?^ 


^^AHVaail^ 


lARYOc.       A^MIIBRARYO^,  ,  \\\E  UNIVERSy/, 


I 


C9 


LIFO/?^      ^OFCALIFO/?^ 


^^\\EUNIVER5'/^ 


vj^lOSANCElfjVK 

o 


%a3AINn3WV^ 


vj^lOSANCEia. 


•i^"^      >&A!iv8gii-#       <rii]ONvsov'<^     "^AiiJAiNa-auv 


VER%        vvlOSANCElfj> 


■soi^      "^aaAiNaawv 


r^r 


^lllBRARYQc 


-s^lLIBRARYOc. 


'^<!/0JnV3JO^ 


^OF-CALIFOff^ 


^(!/0JnV3JO^ 


,^;OFCALIFO%, 

oe 


^OAavaaiii^ 


\WE  UNIVERS'//, 


vj<lOSANCElfj> 


Barbara  1^etn£(tacli  ixttuxti  on 


THE    ETHICS    OF    COOPERATION.      By 

Jambs  H.  Tufts. 
HIGHER     EDUCATION     AND     BUSINESS 

STANDARDS.       By    Willard     Eugbnb 

HOTCHKISS. 

CREATING  CAPITAL:  MONEY-MAKING 
AS  AN  AIM  IN  BUSINESS.   By  Frbdbrick 

L.    LiPMAN. 

IS  CIVILIZATION  A  DISEASE?  By  Stan- 
ton CoiT. 

SOCIAL  JUSTICE  WITHOUT  SOCIALISM. 
By  John  Batbs  Clark. 

THE  CONFLICT  BETWEEN  PRIVATE  MO- 
NOPOLY AND  GOOD  CITIZENSHIP.  By 
John  Graham  Brooks. 

COMMERCIALISM  AND  JOURNALISM.  By 
Hamilton  Holt. 

THE  BUSINESS  CAREER  IN  ITS  PUBLIC 
RELATIONS.     By  Albbrt  Shaw. 


THE  ETHICS  OF 
COOPERATION 


THE  ETHICS 
OF  COOPERATION 


BY 


JAMES  H.  TUFTS 

PROFESSOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY  IN  THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CHICAGO 


BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK 

HOUGHTON  MIFFLIN  COMPANY 

tCbt  BttitTSitit  Ih'tM  Cambrfliiie 

1918 


COPYRIGHT,   I918,  BY  THE  REGENTS  OF  THB 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

ALL  RIGHTS  RESERVED 


Published  September  tQiS 


BARBARA  WEINSTOCK 

LECTURES  ON  THE  MORALS 

OF  TRADE 

This  series  will  contain  essays  by 
representative  scholars  and  men  of 
affairs  dealing  with  the  various  phases 
of  the  morcJ  law  in  its  beeiring  on 
business  life  under  the  new  economic 
order,  first  delivered  at  the  University 
of  California  on  the  Weinstock  founda- 
tion. 


131 


i 


1264402 


THE  ETHICS 
OF   COOPERATION 

I 

ACCORDING  to  Plato's  famous 
myth,  two  gifts  of  the  gods 
equipped  man  for  living :  the  one,  arts  and 
inventions  to  supply  him  with  the  means 
of  livelihood ;  the  other,  reverence  and 
justice  to  be  the  ordering  principles  of 
societies  and  the  bonds  of  friendship  and 
conciliation.  Agencies  for  mastery  over 
nature  and  agencies  for  cooperation 
among  men  remain  the  two  great  sources 
of  human  power.  But  after  two  thousand 
years,  it  is  possible  to  note  an  interesting 
fact  as  to  their  relative  order  of  develop- 


2  THE  ETHICS 

ment  in  civilization.  Nearly  all  the  great 
I  skills  and  inventions  that  had  been  ac- 
;  quired  up  to  the  eighteenth  century  were 
I  brought  into  man's  service  at  a  very  early 
;  date.  The  use  of  fire,  the  arts  of  w^eaver, 
potter,    and    metal    v^orker,    of  sailor, 
hunter,  fisher,  and  sovv^er,  early  fed  man 
and  clothed  him.    These  were  carried 
to  higher  perfection  by  Egyptian  and 
Greek,  by  Tyrian  and  Florentine,  but  it 
would  be  difficult  to  point  to  any  great 
new  unlocking  of  material  resources  un- 
Ul  the  days  of  the  chemist  and  electri- 
cian.  Domestic  animals  and  crude  water 
mills  were  for  centuries  in  man's  serv- 
ice, and  until  steam  was  harnessed,  no 
additions  were  made  of  new  powers. 
During  this  long  period,  however,  the 


OF  COOPERATION  3 

prggress^Oiuman  association  made  great 
and  varied  development.  The  gap  be- 
tween the  men  of  Santander's  caves,  or 
early  Egypt,  and  the  civilization  of  a  cen- 
tury ago  is  bridged  rather  by  union  of 
human  powers,  by  the  needs  and  stim- 
ulating contacts  of  society,  than  by  con- 
quest in  the  field  of  nature.  It  was  in 
military,  political,  and  religious  organ- 
izationthat  the  power  of  associated  effort 
was  first  shown.  Army,  state,  and  hier- 
archy were  its  visible  representatives. 
Then,  a  little  over  a  century  ago,  began 
what  we  call  the  industrial  revolution, 
still  incomplete,  which  combined  new 
natural  forces  with  new  forms  of  human 
association.  Steam,  electricity,  machines, 
the  factory  system,  railroads :  these  sug- 


4  THE  ETHICS 

gest  the  natural  forces  at  man's  disposal ; 
capital,  credit,  corporations,  labor  un- 
ions: these  suggest  the  bringing  together 
of  men  and  their  resources  into  units 
for  exploiting  or  controlling  the  new 
natural  forces.  Sometimes  resisting  the 
political,  military,  or  ecclesiastical  forces 
which  were  earlier  in  the  lead,  some- 
times mastering  them,  sometimes  com- 
bining with  them,  economic  organiza- 
tion has  now  taken  its  place  in  the  world 
as  a  fourth  great  structure,  or  rather  as 
a  fourth  great  agency  through  which 
man  achieves  his  greater  tasks,  and  in 
so  doing  becomes  conscious  of  hitherto 
unrealized  powers. 

Early   in  this   great   process    of  so- 
cial organization  three  divergent  types 


OF  COOPERATION  5 

emerged,  which  still  contend  for  su- 
premacy in  the  worlds  of  action  and  of 
valuation :  dominance,  competition,  and 
cooperation.  All  mean  a  meeting  of  hu- 
man forces.  They  rest  respectively  on 
power,  rivalry,  and  sympathetic  inter- 
change.  Each  may  contribute  to  human 
welfare.  On  the  other  hand,  each  may 
be  taken  so  abstractly  as  to  threaten  hu- 
man values.  I  hope  to  point  out  that 
the  greatest  of  these  is  cooperation,  and 
that  it  is  largely  the  touchstone  for  the 
others. 

Cooperation  and  dominance  both 
mean  organization.  Dominance  implies 
inequality,  direction  and  obedience,  su- 
perior and  subordinate.  Cooperation 
implies  some  sort  of  equality,  some  mu- 


6  THE  ETHICS 

tual  relation.  It  does  not  exclude  dif- 
ference in  ability  or  in  function.  It  does 
not  exclude  leadership,  for  leadership  is 
usually  necessary  to  make  cooperation 
effective.  But  in  dominance  the  special 
excellence  is  kept  isolated;  ideas  are 
transmitted  from  above  downward.  In 
cooperation  there  is  interchange,  cur- 
rents flowing  in  both  directions,  con- 
tacts of  mutual  sympathy,  rather  than 
of  pride-humility,  condescension-servil- 
ity. The  purpose  of  the  joint  pursuit  in 
organization  characterized  by  domi- 
nance may  be  either  the  exclusive  good 
of  the  master  or  the  joint  good  of  the 
whole  organized  group,  but  in  any  case 
it  is  a  purpose  formed  and  kept  by 
those  few  who  know.    The  group  may 


OF  COOPERATION  7 

share  in  its  execution  and  its  benefits, 
but  not  in  its  construction  or  in  the  es- 
timating and  forecasting  of  its  values. 
The  purpose  in  cooperation  is  joint. 
Whether  originally  suggested  by  some 
leader  of  thought  or  action,  or  whether 
a  composite  of  many  suggestions  in  the 
give  and  take  of  discussion  or  in  experi- 
ences of  common  need,  it  is  weighed 
and  adopted  as  a  common  end.  It  is 
not  the  work  or  possession  of  leaders 
alone,  but  embodies  in  varying  degrees 
the  work  and  active  interest  of  all. 

Cooperation  and  competition  at  first 
glance  may  seem  more  radically  op- 
posed. For  while  dominance  and  coop- 
eration both  mean  union  of  forces, 
competition   appears   to   mean    antago- 


8  THE  ETHICS 

nism.  Tihey  stand  for  combination;  // 
for  exclusion  of  one  by  another.  Yet  a 
deeper  look  shows  that  this  is  not  true 
L^  of  competition  in  what  we  may  call  its 
J^*  social,  as  contrasted  with  its  unsocial, 
aspect.  The  best  illustration  of  what  I 
venture  to  call  social  competition  is 
sport.  Here  is  rivalry,  and  here  in  any 
given  contest  one  wins,  the  other  loses, 
or  few  win  and  many  lose.  But  the 
great  thing  in  sport  is  not  to  win ;  the 
great  thing  is  the  game,  the  contest; 
and  the  contest  is  no  contest  unless  the 
contestants  are  so  nearly  equal  as  to  for- 
bid any  certainty  in  advance  as  to  which 
will  win.  The  best  sport  is  found  when 
no  one  contestant  wins  too  often.  There 
is  in  reality  a  common  purpose  —  the 


OF  COOPERATION  9 

zest  of  contest.  Players  combine  and 
compete  to  carry  out  this  purpose;  and 
the  rules  are  designed  so  to  restrict  the 
competition  as  to  rule  out  certain  kinds 
of  action  and  preserve  friendly  rela- 
tions. The  contending  rivals  are  in  re- 
ality uniting  to  stimulate  each  other. 
Without  the  cooperation  there  would 
be  no  competition,  and  the  competition 
is  so  conducted  as  to  continue  the  rela- 
tion. Competition  in  the  world  of 
thought  is  similarly  social.  In  efforts 
to  reach  a  solution  of  a  scientific  prob- 
lem or  to  discuss  a  policy,  the  spur  of 
rivalry  or  the  matching  of  wits  aids  the 
common  purpose  of  arriving  at  the 
truth.  Similar  competition  exists  in 
business.    Many  a  firm  owes  its  success 


lo  THE  ETHICS 

to  the  competition  of  its  rivals  which 
hasTorced  it  to  be  efficient,  progressive. 
As  a  manufacturing  friend  once  re- 
marked to  me  :  "  When  the  other  man 
sells  cheaper,  you  generally  find  he  has 
found  out  something  you  don't  know.'* 
But  we  also  apply  the  term  '^compe- 
tition "  to  rivalry  in  which  there  is  no 
common  purpose;  to  contests  in  which 
there  is  no  intention  to  continue  or  re- 
peat the  match,  and  in  which  no  rules 
control.  Weeds  compete  with  flowers 
and  crowd  them  out.  The  factory  com- 
petes with  the  hand  loom  and  banishes 
it.  The  trust  competes  with  the  small 
firm  and  puts  it  out  of  business.  The 
result  is  monopoly.  When  plants  or 
inventions  are  thus  said  to  compete  for 


OF  COOPERATION  ii 

a  place,  there  is  frequently  no  room  for 
both  competitors,  and  no  social  gain  by 
keeping  both  in  the  field.  Competition 
serves  here  sometimes  as  a  method  of 
selection,  although  no  one  would  decide 
to  grow  weeds  rather  than  flowers  be- 
cause weeds  are  more  efficient.  In  the 
case  of  what  are  called  natural  monop- 
olies, there  is  duplication  of  effi^rt  instead 
of  cooperation.  Competition  is  here 
wasteful.  But  when  we  have  to  do,  not 
with  a  specific  product,  or  with  a  fixed 
field  such  as  that  of  street  railways  or  city 
lighting,  but  with  the  open  field  of  in- 
vention and  service,  we  need  to  provide  j 
for  continuous  cooperation,  and  compe-  j 
tition  seems  at  least  one  useful  agency.' 
To  retain  this,  we  frame  rules  against 


V. 


la  THE  ETHICS 

"  unfair  competition.*'  As  the  rules  of 
sport  are  designed  to  place  a  premium 
upon  certain  kinds  of  strength  and  skill 
.which  make  a  good  game,  so  the  rules 
j  of  fair  competition  are  designed  to  se- 
tjS-'Icure  efficiency  for  public  service,  and 
^\  to  exclude  efficiency  in  choking  or 
'  fouling.  In  unfair  competition  there  is 
no  common  purpose  of  public  service 
or  of  advancing  skill  or  invention; 
hence,  no  cooperation.  The  coopera- 
tive purpose  or  result  is  thus  the  test  of 
useful,  as  contrasted  with  wasteful  or 
harmful,  competition. 

There  is  also  an  abstract  conception 

of  cooperation,  which,  in  its  one-sided 

'  emphasis   upon   equality,  excludes   any 

form  of  leaderships  or  direction,  and  in 


OF  COOPERATION  13 

fear  of  inequality  allows  no  place  for 
competition.  Selection  of  rulers  by  lot 
in  a  large  and  complex  group  is  one  illus- 
tration ;  jealous  suspicion  of  ability,  which 
becomes  a  cult  of  incompetence,  is  an- 
other. Refusals  to  accept  inventions 
which  require  any  modification  of  in- 
dustry, or  to  recognize  any  inequalities 
of  service,  are  others.  But  these  do  not 
affect  the  value  of  the  principle  as  we  can 
now  define  it  in  preliminary  fashion: 
union  tending  to  secure  common  ends, 
by  a  method  which  promotes  equality, 
and  with  an  outcome  of  increased  power 
shared  by  all. 


II 
What  are  we  to  understand  by  the 
Ethics  of  Cooperation?  Can  we  find 
some  external  standard  of  unquestioned 
value  or  absolute  duty  by  which  to  meas- 
ure the  three  processes  of  society  which 
we  have  named,  dominance,  competition, 
cooperation?  Masters  of  the  past  have 
offered  many  such,  making  appeal  to  the 
logic  of  reason  or  the  response  of  senti- 
ment, to  the  will  for  mastery  or  the  claim 
of  benevolence.  To  make  a  selection 
without  giving  reasons  would  seem  arbi- 
trary ;  to  attempt  a  reasoned  discussion 
would  take  us  quite  beyond  the  bounds 
appropriate  to  this  lecture.  But  aside 
from  the  formulations  of  philosophers. 


/y  -      .    0    y  rM*^    /i .  D 


OF  COOPERATION  15 

humanity  has  been  struggling  —  often 
rather  haltingly  and  blindly  —  for  cer- 
taingo2^  and  setting  certain  sign-posts 
which,  if  they  do  not  point  to  a  highway, 
at  least  mark  certain  paths  as  blind  alleys. 
Such  goods  I  take  to  be  the  great  words, 
liberty,  power,  justice;  such  signs  of  blind 
paths  I  take  to  be  rigidity,  passive  accept- 
ance of  what  is. 

But  those  great  words,  just  because 
they  are  so  great,  are  given  various  mean- 
ings by  those  who  would  claim  them  for 
their  own.  Nor  is  there  complete  agree- 
ment as  to  just  what  paths  deserve  to  be 
posted  as  leading  nowhere.  Groups  char- 
acterized by  dominance,  cut-throat  com- 
petition, or  cooperation,  tend  to  work  out 
each  its  own  interpretations  of  liberty, 


i6  THE  ETHICS 

power,  justice ;  its  own  code  for  the  con- 
duct of  its  members.  Without  assuming 
to  decide  your  choice,  I  can  indicate 
briefly  what  the  main  elements  in  these 
values  and  codes  are. 

The  group  of  masters  and  servants 
will  develop  what  we  have  learned  to 
call  a  morality  of  masters  and  a  moral- 
ity of  slaves.  This  was  essentially  the 
code  of  the  feudal  system.  We  have  sur- 
vivals of  such  a  group  morality  in  our 
code  of  the  gentleman,  which  in  Eng- 
land still  depreciates  manual  labor,  al- 
though it  has  been  refined  arid  softened 
and  enlarged  to  include  respect  for  other 
than  military  and  sportsman  virtues.  The 
code  of  masters  exalts  liberty — for  the 
ruling  class  —  and  resents  any  restraint 


OF  COOPERATION  17 

by  inferiors  or  civilians,  or  by  public 
opinion  of  any  group  but  its  own.  It  has 
a  justice  which  takes  for  its  premise  a 
graded  social  order,  and  seeks  to  put  and 
keep  every  man  in  his  place.  But  its 
supreme  value  is  power,  likewise  for 
the  few,  or  for  the  state  as  consisting  of 
society  organized  and  directed  by  the 
ruling  class.  Such  a  group,  according  to 
Treitschke,  will  also  need  war,  in  order 
to  test  and  exhibit  its  power  to  the  utmost 
in  fierce  struggle  with  other  powers.  It 
will  logically  honor  war  as  good. 

A  group  practicing  cut-throat  com- 
petition will  simply  reverse  the  order: 
first,  struggle  to  put  rivals  out  of  the 
field;  then,  monopoly  with  unlimited 
power  to  control  the  market  or  possess 


1 8  THE  ETHICS 

the  soil.  It  appeals  to  nature's  struggle 
for  existence  as  its  standard  for  human 
life.  It  too  sets  a  high  value  upon  liberty 
in  the  sense  of  freedom  from  control, 
but  originating  as  it  did  in  resistance  to 

(control  by  privilege  and  other  aspects  of 
dominance,  it  has  never  learned  the  de- 
i  fects  of  a  liberty  which  takes  no  account 
I  of  ignorance,  poverty,  and  ill  health.  It 
knows  the  liberty  of  nature,  the  liberty 
of  the  strong  and  the  swift,  but  not  the 
liberty  achieved  by  the  common  effort 
for  all.  It  knows  justice,  but  a  justice 
which  is  likely  to  be  defined  as  securing 
to  each  his  natural  liberty,  and  which 
therefore  means  non-interference  with 
the  struggle  for  existence  except  to  pre- 
vent violence  and  fraud.   It  takes  no  ac- 


OF  COOPERATION  19 

count  as  to  whether  the  struggle  kills  few 
or  many,  or  distributes  goods  widely  or 
sparingly,  or  whether  indeed  there  is  any 
room  at  the  table  which  civilization 
spreads;  though  it  does  not  begrudge 
charity  if  administered  under  that  name. 

A^^P?L?Ltl!lS  K^^pyp  ^^s  two  working 
principles:  first,>'common  purpose  and 
common  good ;  second,  that  men  can 
achieve  by  common  effort  what  they  can- 
not accomplish  singly.  The  first,  rein- 
forced by  the  actual  interchange  of  ideas 
and  services,  tends  to  favor  equality.  It 
implies  mutual  respect,  confidence,  and 
good- will .  The  second  favors  a  construc- 
tive and  progressive  attitude,  which  will 
find  standards  neither  in  nature  nor  in 
humanity's  past,  since  it  conceives  man 


ao  THE  ETHICS 

able  to  change  conditions  to  a  consider- 
able extent  and  thus  to  realize  new  goods. 
These  principles  tend  toward  ^  type 
qf  liberty  different  from  those  just  men- 
I  tioned.  As  contrasted  with  the  liberty  of 
a  dominant  group,  cooperation  favors  a 
liberty  for  all,  a  liberty  of  live  and  let 
live,  a  tolerance  and  welcome  for  vari- 
ation in  type,  provided  only  this  is  willing 
to  make  its  contribution  to  the  common 
weal.  Instead  of  imitation  or  passive  ac- 
ceptance of  patterns  on  the  part  of  the 
majority,  it  stimulates  active  construc- 
tion. As  contrasted  with  the  liberty  fa- 
vored in  competing  groups,  cooperation 
would  emphasize  positive  control  over 
natural  forces,  over  health  conditions, 
over  poverty  and  fear.  It  would  make  each 


OF  COOPERATION  21 

person  share  as  fully  as  possible  in  the 
knowledge  and  strength  due  to  combined 
effort,  and  thus  liberate  him  from  many 
of  the  limitations  which  have  hitherto 
hampered  him. 

Similarly  with  justice.  Cooperation's 
ethics  of  distribution  is  not  rigidly  set  by 
the  actual  interest  and  rights  of  the  past 
on  the  one  hand,  nor  by  hitherto  avail- 
able resources  on  the  other.  Neither  nat- 
ural rights  nor  present  ability  and  present 
service  form  a  complete  measure.  Since 
cooperation  evokes  new  interests  and  new 
capacities,  it  is  hospitable  to  new  claims 
and  new  rights ;  since  it  makes  new 
sources  of  supply  available,  it  has  in  view 
the  possibility  at  least  of  doing  better  for 
all  than  can  an  abstract  insistence  upon 


22  THE  ETHICS 

old  claims.  It  may  often  avoid  the  dead- 
lock of  a  rigid  system.  It  is  better  to  grow 
two  blades  of  grass  than  to  dispute  who 
shall  have  the  larger  fraction  of  the  one 
which  has  previously  been  the  yield.  It 
is  better,  not  merely  because  there  is  more 
grass,  but  also  because  men's  attitude  be- 
comes forward-looking  and  constructive, 
not  pugnacious  and  rigid. 

Power  is  likewise  a  value  in  a  cooper- 
ating group,  but  it  must  be  power  not 
merely  used  for  the  good  of  all,  but  to 
some  extent  controlled  by  all  and  thus 
actually  shared.  Only  as  so  controlled 
and  so  shared  is  power  attended  by  the 
responsibility  which  makes  it  safe  for  its 
possessors.  Only  on  this  basis  does  power 
over  other  men  permit  the  free  choices 


OF  COOPERATION  23 

on  their  part  which  are  essential  to  full 
moral  life. 

As  regards  the  actual  efficiency  of  a  co- 
operating group,  it  may  be  granted  that 
its  powers  are  not  so  rapidly  mobilized. 
In  small,  homogeneous  groups,  the  loss 
of  time  is  small ;  in  large  groups  the  for- 
mation of  public  opinion  and  the  conver- 
sion of  this  into  action  is  still  largely  a 
problem  rather  than  an  achievement. 
New  techniques  have  to  be  developed, 
and  it  may  be  that  for  certain  military 
tasks  the  military  technique  will  always 
be  more  efficient.  To  the  cooperative 
group,  however,  this  test  will  not  be  the 
ultimate  ethical  test.  It  will  rather  con- 
sider the  possibilities  of  substituting  for 
war  other  activities  in  which  cooperation 


24  THE  ETHICS 

is  superior.  And  if  the  advocate  of  war 
insists  that  war  as  such  is  the  most  glori- 
ous and  desirable  type  of  life,  cooperation 
may  perhaps  fail  to  convert  him.  But  it 
may  hope  to  create  a  new  order  whose  ex- 
cellence shall  be  justified  of  her  children. 

Ill 

A  glance  at  the  past  roles  of  domi- 
nance, competition,  and  cooperation  in 
the  institutions  of  government,  religion, 
and  commerce  and  industry,  will  aid  us 
to  consider  cooperation  in  relation  to 
present  international  problems. 

Primitive  tribal  life  had  elements  of 
each  of  the  three  principles  we  have 
named.  But  with  discovery  by  some  gen- 
ius of  the  power  of  organization  for  war 


OF  COOPERATION  25 

the  principle  of  dominance  won,  seem-     /v 
ingly  at  a  flash,  a  decisive  position.  No  ^ 
power  of  steam  or  lightning  has  beeiv^ 
so  spectacular  and  wide-reaching  as  the  ^^ 
power  which  Egyptian,  Assyrian,  Mace- 
donian, Roman,  and  their  modern  suc- 
cessors introduced  and  controlled.  Po- 
litical states  owing  their  rise  to  military 
means  naturally  followed  the  military 
pattern.  The  sharp  separation  between 
ruler  or  ruling  group  and  subject  people, 
based  on  conquest,  was  perpetuated  in 
class  distinction.  Gentry  and  simple,  lord 
and  villein,  were  indeed  combined  in  ex- 
ploitation of  earth's  resources,  but  co- 
operation was  in  the  background,  mastery 
in  the  fore.  And  when  empires  included 
peoples  of  various  races  and  cultural  ad- 


26  THE  ETHICS 

vance  the  separation  between  higher  and 
lower  became  intensified.  Yet  though 
submerged  for  long  periods,  the  principle 
of  cooperation  has  asserted  itself,  step  by 
step  and  it  seldom  loses  ground.  Begin- 
ning usually  in  some  group  which  at  first 
combined  to  resist  dominance,  it  has 
made  its  way  through  such  stages  as 
equality  before  the  law,  abolition  of 
special  privileges,  extension  of  suffrage, 
influence  of  public  sentiment,  inter- 
ohange  of  ideas,  toward  genuine  partici- 
pation  by  all  in  the  dignity  and  respon- 
sibility  of  political^power.  It  builds  a 
Panama  Canal,  it  maintains  a  great  sys- 
tem of  education,  and  has,  we  may  easily 
believe,  yet  greater  tasks  in  prospect.  It 
may  be  premature  to  predict  its  complete 


OF  COOPERATION  27 

displacement  of  dominance  in  our  own 
day  as  a  method  of  government,  yet  who 
in  America  doubts  its  ultimate  preva- 
lence ? 

Religion  presents  a  fascinating  mixture <f^^ 
of  cooperation  with  dominance  on  the^^C^^ 
one  hand,  and  exclusiveness  on  the  other.  ^*^ 
The  central  fact  is  the  community,  which  ^ 
seeks  some  common  end  in  ritual,  or  in  ^^ 
beneficent  activity.  But  at  an  early  pe-  ^ 
riod  leaders  became  invested,  or  invested  / 
themselves,  with  a  sanctity  which  led  to  ^^^ 
dominance.  Not  the  power  of  force,  but 
that  of  mystery  and  the  invisible  raised  v 
the  priest  above  the  level  of  the  many.^  * 
And,  on  another  side,  competition  be-  ^  ' 
tween  rival  national  religions,  like  that  , 
between  states,  excluded  friendly  con- 


a8  THE  ETHICS 

tacts.  Jew  and  Samaritan  had  no  deal- 
ings ;  between  the  followers  of  Baal  and 
Jehovah  there  was  no  peace  but  by  ex- 
termination. Yet  it  was  religion  which 
confronted  the  Herrenmoral  with  the  first 
reversal  of  values,  and  declared,  "So 
shall  it  not  be  among  you.  But  who- 
soever will  be  great  among  you  let  him 
be  your  minister.*'  And  it  was  religion 
which  cut  across  national  boundaries  in 
its  vision  of  what  Professor  Royce  so 
happily  calls  the  Great  Community.  Pro- 
test against  dominance  resulted,  however, 
in  divisions,  and  although  cooperation  in 
practical  activities  has  done  much  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  national  understanding, 
the  hostile  forces  of  the  world  to-day  lack 
the   restraint  which   might  have  come 


OF  COOPERATION  29 

from  a  united  moral  sentiment  and  moral 
will. 

In  the  economic  field  the  story  of 
dominance,  cooperation,   and  competi->Q^ 
tion  is  more  complex  than  in  govern-^ 
ment  and  religion.  It  followed  somewhat  ^5 
different  courses  in  trade  and  in  industry.      Af 
The  simplest  way  to  supply  needs  with  ^>^ 
goods  is  to  go  and  take  them;  the  sim-       I 
plest  way  to  obtain  services  is  to  seize  *^ix^ 
them.   Dominance  in  the  first  case  gives 
piracy  and  plunder,  when  directed  against 
those  without ;  fines  and  taxes,  when  ex- 
ercised upon  those  within ;  in  the  second 
case,  it  gives  slavery  or  forced  levies.  But 
trade,  as  a  voluntary  exchange  of  pres- 
ents, or  as  a  bargaining  for  mutual  ad- 
vantage, had  likewise  its  early  begin- 


30  THE  ETHICS 

nings.  Carried  on  at  first  with  timidity 
and  distrust,  because  the  parties  belonged 
to  different  groups,  it  has  developed  a 
high  degree  of  mutual  confidence  be- 
tween merchant  and  customer,  banker 
and  client,  insurer  and  insured.  By  its 
system  of  contracts  and  fiduciary  rela- 
tions, which  bind  men  of  the  most  vary- 
ing localities,  races,  occupations,  social 
classes,  and  national  allegiance,  it  has 
woven  a  new  net  of  human  relations  far 
more  intricate  and  wide-reaching  than 
the  natural  ties  of  blood  kinship.  It  rests 
upon_mutual  responsibility  and  good 
faith;  it  is  a  constant  force  for  their 
extension.  ' 

The  industrial  side  of  the  process  has 
had  similar  influence  toward  union.  Free 


OF  COOPERATION  31 

craftsmen  in  the  towns  found  mutual 
support  in  gilds,  when  as  yet  the  farm 
laborer  or  villein  had  to  get  on  as  best 
he  could  unaided.  The  factory  system 
itself  has  been  largely  organized  from 
above  down.  It  has  very  largely  assumed 
that  the  higher  command  needs  no  ad- 
vice or  ideas  from  below.  Hours  of  labor, 
shop  conditions,  wages,  have  largely  been 
fixed  by  "orders,"  just  as  governments 
once  ruled  by  decrees.  But  as  dominance , 
in  government  has  led  men  to  unite 
against  the  new  power  and  then  has 
yielded  to  the  more  complete  coopera- 
tion of  participation,  so  in  industry  the 
factory  system  has  given  rise  to  the  labor 
movement.  As  for  the  prospects  of  fuller 
cooperation,  this  may  be  said  already  to 


3a  THE  ETHICS 

have  displaced  the  older  autocratic  sys- 
tem within  the  managing  group,  and  the 
war  is  giving  an  increased  impetus  to  ex- 
tension of  the  process. 
*    ^V      Exchange  of  goods  and  services  is  in- 
^    deed  a  threefold  cooperation :  it  xneets 
^4     wants  which  the  parties  cannot  them- 
,        selves  satisfy  or   cannot  well  satisfy;  it 
r^jawakens  new  wants;  it  calls  new  inven- 
tions and  new  forces  into^play.  It  thus 
not  only  satisfies  man's  existing  nature, 
but  enlarges  his  capacity  for  enjoyment 
and  his  active  powers.  It  makes  not  only 
for  comfort,  but  for  progress. 

IV 

If  trade  and  industry,  however,  em- 
body so  fully  the  principle  of  coopera- 


OF  COOPERATION  33 

tion,  how  does  it  come  about  that  they  ^^ 
have  on  the   whole  had  a  rather  low  ^^ 
reputation,  not  only  among   the  class  ,j;]gs 
groups  founded  on  militarism,  but  among  ^ 
philosophers  and  moralists  ?  Why  do  we  ^  ' 
find  the  present  calamities  of  war  charged 
to  economic  causes  ?  Perhaps  the  answer 
to  these  questions  will  point  the  path 
along  which  better  cooperation  may  be 
expected. 

There  is,  from  the  outset,  one  defect 
in  the  cooperation  between  buyer  and 
seller,  employer  and  laborer.  The  co- 
operation is  largely  unintended.  Each  is 
primarily  thinking  of  his  own  advan- 
tage, rather  than  that  of  the  other,  or 
of  the  social  whole;  he  is  seeking  it  in 
terms  of  money,  which  as  a  material  ob- 


0 


34  THE  ETHICS 

ject  must  be  in  the  pocket  of  one  party 
or  of  the  other,  and  is  not,  like  friend- 
ship or  beauty,  sharable.  Mutual  benefit 
is  the  result  of  exchange — it  need  not 
be  the  motive.  This  benefit  comes  about 
afijif  it  were  arranged  by  an  invisible 
hand,  said  Adam  Smith.  Indeed,  it  was 
long  held  that  if  one  of  the  bargainers 
gained,  the  other  must  lose.  And  when 
under  modern  conditions  labor  is  con- 
sidered as  a  commodity  to  be  bought  and 
sold  in  the  cheapest  market  by  an  im- 
personal corporate  employer,  there  is  a 
strong  presumption  against  the  coopera- 
tive attitude  on  either  side. 

The  great  problem  here  is,  therefore : 
How  can  men  be  brought  to  seek  con- 
sciously what  now  they  unintentiona.lly 


OF  COOPERATION  35 

produce  ?  How  can  the  man  whose  ends 
are  both  self-centered  and  ignoble  be 
changed  into  |:he  man  whose  ends  are 
wide  and  high  ?  Something  may  doubt- 
less be  done  by  showing  that  a  narrow 
selfishness  is  stupid.  If  we  rule  out  mo- 
nopoly the  best  way  to  gain  great  suc- 
cess is  likely  to  lie  through  meeting 
needs  of  a  great  multitude ;  and  to  meet 
these  effectively  implies  entering  by  im- 
agination and  sympathy  into  their  situa- 
tion. The  business  maxim  of  "service," 
the  practices  of  refunding  money  if  goods 
are  unsatisfactory,  of  one  price  to  all,  of 
providing  sanitary  and  even  attractive 
factories  and  homes,  and  of  paying  a 
minimum  wage  far  in  excess  of  the  mar- 
ket price,  have  often  proved  highly  re- 


S6  THE  ETHICS 

munerative.  Yet,  I  should  not  place  ex- 
clusive, and  perhaps  not  chief,  reliance 
on  these  methods  of  appeal.  They  are 
analogous  to  the  old  maxim,  honesty  is 
the  best  policy ;  and  we  know  too  well 
that  while  this  holds  under  certain  con- 
ditions, —  that  is,  among  intelligent  peo- 
ple, or  in  the  long  run,  —  it  is  often  pos- 
sible to  acquire  great  gains  by  exploiting 
the  weak,  deceiving  the  ignorant,  or 
perpetrating  a  fraud  of  such  proportions 
that  men  forget  its  dishonesty  in  admira- 
tion at  its  audacity.    In  the  end  it  is 

'  likely  to  prove  that  the  level  of  economic 
life  is  to  be  raised  not  by  proving  that 
cooperation  will  better  satisfy  selfish  and 
ignoble  interests,  but  rather  by  creating 

^  new  standards  for  measuring  success,  new 


OF  COOPERATION  37 

interests  in  social  and  worthy  ends,  and  ^ 
by  strengthening  the  appeal  of  duty 
where  this  conflicts  with  present  inter- 
ests. The  one  method  stakes  all  on  hu- 
man nature  as  it  is ;  the  other  challenges 
man's  capacity  to  listen  to  new  appeals 
and  respond  to  better  motives.  It  is,  if 
you  please,  idealism  ;  but  before  it  is  dis- 
missed as  worthless,  consider  what  has 
been  achieved  in  substituting  social  mo- 
tives in  the  field  of  political  action. 
There  was  a  time  when  the  aim  in  polit- 
ical life  was  undisguisedly  selfish.  The 
state,  in  distinction  from  the  kinship 
group  or  the  village  community,  was 
organized  for  power  and  profit.  It  was 
nearly  a  gigantic  piratical  enterprise, 
highly  profitable  to  its  managers.  The 


38  THE  ETHICS 

shepherd,  says  Thrasymachus  in  Plato's 
dialogue,  does  not  feed  his  sheep  for 
their  benefit,  but  for  his  own.  Yet  now, 
what  president  or  minister,  legislator  or 
judge,  would  announce  as  his  aim  to 
acquire  the  greatest  financial  profit  from 
his  position  ?  Even  in  autocratically  gov- 
erned countries,  it  is  at  least  the  assump- 
tion that  the  good  of  the  state  does  not 
mean  solely  the  prestige  and  wealth  of 
the  ruler. 

A  great  social  and  political  order  has 
been  built  up,  and  we  all  hold  that  it 
must  not  be  exploited  for  private  gain. 
It  has  not  been  created  or  maintained 
by  chance.  Nor  could  it  survive  if  every 
man  sought  primarily  his  own  advan- 
tage and  left  the  commonwealth  to  care 


OF  COOPERATION  39 

for  itself.  Nor  in  a  democracy  would 
it  be  maintained,  provided  the  govern- 
ing class  alone  were  disinterested,  de- 
prived of  private  property,  and  given 
education,  as  Plato  suggested.  The  only) 
safety  is  in  the  general  and  intelligent 
desire  for  the  public  interest  and  com- 
mon welfare.  At  this  moment  almost 
unanimous  acceptance  of  responsibility 
for  what  we  believe  to  be  the  public 
good  and  the  maintenance  of  American 
ideals  —  though  it  brings  to  each  of  us 
sacrifice  and  to  many  the  full  measure 
of  devotion  —  bears  witness  to  the  abil- 
ity of  human  nature  to  adopt  as  its  com- 
pelling motives  a  high  end  which  op- 
poses private  advantage. 

Is  the  economic  process  too  desperate 


40  THE  ETHICS 

a  field  for  larger  motives  ?  To  me  it 
seems  less  desperate  than  the  field  of 
government  in  the  days  of  autocratic 
kings.  One  great  need  is  to  substitute  a 
different  standard  of  success  for  the  finan- 
cial gains  which  have  seemed  the  only 
test.  Our  schools  of  commerce  are  aim- 
ing to  perform  this  service,  by  intro- 
ducing professional  standards.  A  physi- 
cian is  measured  by  his  ability  to  cure 
the  sick,  an  engineer  by  the  soundness 
of  his  bridge  and  ship;  why  not  meas- 
ure a  railroad  president  by  his  ability  to 
supply  coal  in  winter,  to  run  trains  on 
time,  and  decrease  the  cost  of  freight, 
rather  than  by  his  private  accumula- 
tions? Why  not  measure  a  merchant 
or  banker  by  similar  tests? 


OF  COOPERATION  41 

Mankind  has  built  up  a  great  eco- 
nomic system.  Pioneer,  adventurer,  in- 
ventor, scientist,  laborer,  organizer,  all 
have  contributed.  It  is  as  essential  to 
human  w^elfare  as  the  political  system, 
and  like  that  system  it  comes  to  us  as 
an  inheritance.  I  can  see  no  reason  whyf 
it  should  be  thought  unworthy  of  a 
statesman  or  a  judge  to  use  the  political 
structure  for  his  own  profit,  but  per- 
fectly justifiable  for  a  man  to  exploit 
the  economic  structure  for  private  gain. 
This  does  not  necessarily  exclude  profit ' 
as  a  method  of  paying  for  services,  and 
of  increasing  capital  needed  for  develop- 
ment, but  it  would  seek  to  adjust  profits 
to  services,  and  treat  capital,  just  as  it 
regards  political  power,  as  a  public  trust 


42  THE  ETHICS 

in  need  of  cooperative   regulation  and 
to  be  used  for  the  general  welfare. 

But  the  war  is  teaching  with  dra- 
matic swiftness  what  it  might  have  need- 
ed decades  of  peace  to  bring  home  to  us. 
We  are  thinking  of  the  common  wel- 
fare. High  prices  may  still  be  a  rough 
guide  to  show  men's  needs,  but  we  are 
learning  to  raise  wheat  because  others 
need  it  —  not  merely  because  the  price 
is  high.  Prices  may  also  be  a  rough 
guide  to  consumption,  but  we  are  learn- 
ing that  eating  wheat  or  sugar  is  not 
merely  a  matter  of  what  I  can  afford. 
It  is  a  question  of  whether  I  take  wheat 
or  sugar  away  from  some  one  else  who 
needs  it  —  the  soldier  in  France,  the 
child  in  Belgium,  the  family  of  my  less 


OF  COOPERATION  43 

fortunate  neighbor.  The  great  argu- 
ment for  not  interfering  with  private 
exchange  in  all  such  matters  has  been 
that  if  prices  should  by  some  authority 
be  kept  low  in  time  of  scarcity,  men 
would  consume  the  supply  too  rapidly ; 
whereas  if  prices  rise  in  response  to 
scarcity,  men  at  once  begin  to  econo- 
mize and  so  prevent  the  total  exhaus- 
tion of  the  supply.  We  now  reflect  that 
if  prices  of  milk  rise  it  does  not  mean 
uniform  economy  —  it  means  cutting 
off  to  a  large  degree  the  children  of  the 
poor  and  leaving  relatively  untouched 
the  consumption  of  the  well-to-do. 
Merely  raising  the  price  of  meat  or 
wheat  means  taking  these  articles  from 
the  table  of  one  class  to  leave  them 


44  THE  ETHICS 

upon  the  table  of  another.  War,  re- 
quiring, as  it  does,  the  united  strength 
and  purpose  of  the  whole  people,  has 
found  this  method  antiquated.  In  Eu- 
rope governments  have  said  to  their 
peoples  :  we  must  all  think  of  the  com- 
mon weal ;  we  must  all  share  alike.  In 
this  country,  the  appeal  of  the  food  ad- 
ministrator, though  largely  without  force 
of  law,  has  been  loyally  answered  by 
the  great  majority.  It  is  doubtless  rash 
to  predict  how  much  peace  will  retain 
of  what  war  has  taught,  but  who  of  us 
will  again  say  so  easily,  "  My  work  or 
leisure,  my  economy  or  my  luxury,  is 
my  own  affair,  if  I  can  afford  it  ?  '*  Who 
can  fail  to  see  that  common  welfare 
comes  not  without  common  intention  ? 


OF  COOPERATION  45 

The  second  great  defect  in  our  eco- 
nomic order,  from  the  point  of  view 
of  cooperation,  has  been  the  inequality 
of  its  distribution.  This  has  been  due 
largely  to  competition  when  parties 
were  unequal,  not  merely  in  their  abil- 
ity, but  in  their  opportunity.  And  the 
most  serious,  though  not  the  most  ap- 
parent, aspect  of  this  inequality,  has  not 
been  that  some  have  more  comfort 
•or  luxuries  to  enjoy;  it  is  the  fact  that 
wealth  means  power.  In  so  far  as  it  can 
set  prices  on  all  that  we  eat,  wear,  and 
enjoy,  it  is  controlling  the  intimate  af- 
fairs of  life  more  thoroughly  than  any 
government  ever  attempted.  In  so  far 
as  it  controls  natural  resources,  means 
of  transportation,  organization  of  credit. 


46  THE  ETHICS 

and  the  capital  necessary  for  large-scale 
manufacturing  and  marketing,  it  can 
set  prices.  The  great  questions  then 
are,  as  with  political  power :  How  can 
this  great  power  be  cooperatively  used  ? 
Is  it  serving  all  or  a  few  ? 

Two  notable  doctrines  of  the  courts 
point  ways  for  ethics.  The  first  is  that 
of  property  affected  with  public  interest. 
Applied  thus  far  by  the  courts  to  ware- 
houses, transportation,  and  similar  pub- 
lic services,  what  limits  can  we  set  eth- 
ically to  the  doctrine  that  power  of  one 
man  over  his  fellows,  whether  through 
his  office,  or  through  his  property,  is 
affected  with  public  interest  ? 

The  police  power,  which  sets  the  wel- 
fare of  all  above  private  property  when 


OF  COOPERATION  47 

these  conflict,  is  a  second  doctrine  whose 
ethical  import  far  outruns  its  legal  ap- 
plications. 

Yet  it  is  by  neither  of  these  that  the 
most  significant  progress  has  been  made 
toward  removing  that  handicap  of  in- 
equality which  is  the  chief  injustice  of 
our  economic  system.  It  is  by  our  great 
educational  system,  liberal  in  its  provi- 
sions, generously  supported  by  all  classes, 
unselfishly  served,  opening  to  all  doors 
of  opportunity  which  once  were  closed 
to  the  many,  the  most  successful  depart- 
ment of  our  democratic  institutions  in 
helping  and  gaining  confidence  of  all 
—  a  system  of  which  this  University  of 
California  is  one  of  the  most  notable 
leaders  and  the  most  useful  members  — 


48  THE  ETHICS 

that  fair  conditions  for  competition  and 
intelligent  cooperation  in  the  economic 
world  are  increasingly  possible. 

V 

What  bearing  has  this  sketch  of  the 
significance  and  progress  of  cooperation 
upon  the  international  questions  which 
now  overshadow  all  else?  Certainly  the 
world  cannot  remain  as  before:  great 
powers  struggling  for  empire;  lesser 
powers  struggling  for  their  separate  ex- 
istence ;  great  areas  of  backward  peoples 
viewed  as  subjects  for  exploitation;  we 
.  ourselves  aloof.  It  must  then  choose  be- 
tween a  future  world  order  based  on 
dominance,  which  means  world  empire; 

r)rld  order  based  on  nationalism  joined 


OF  COOPERATION  49 

with^hgjion-social  type  of  competition,  j 
which  means,  every  nation  the  judge  of  I 
its  own  interests,  continuance  of  jeal- 
ousies and  from  time  to  time  the  recur- 
rence  of  war ;  and'  a  world  order  based 
on  nationalism^lus  international  cooper- 
ation, "  to  establish  justice,  to  provide  for 
common  defense,  to  promote  the  gen- 
eral welfare,  and  to  secure  the  blessings 
of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity.** 
It  is  not  necessary  to  discuss  in  this 
country  the  principle  of  dominance  and 
world  empire.  It  contradicts  our  whole 
philosophy.  Safety  for  dominance  lies 
only  in  a  civilization  of  discipline  from 
above  down,  in  ruthless  repression  of  all 
thinking  on  the  part  of  the  subject  class 
or  race. 


50  THE  ETHICS 

Nor  can  I  see  any  genuine  alternative 
in  what  some  advocate  —  reliance  by 
each  nation  on  its  ov^n  military  strength 
as  the  sole  effective  guarantee  for  its  in- 
terests. After  the  military  lessons  of  this 
w^LTy  the  concentration  of  scientific,  eco- 
nomic, and  even  educational  attention 
upon  military  purposes  w^ould  almost  in- 
evitably be  vastly  in  excess  of  anything 
previously  conceived.  What  limits  can 
be  set  to  the  armies  of  France  and  Great 
Britain  if  these  are  to  protect  those  coun- 
tries from  a  German  empire  already 
double  its  previous  extent,  and  taking 
steps  to  control  the  resources  of  eastern 
Europe  and  the  near  East?  What  navy 
could  guarantee  German  commerce 
against  the   combined  forces  of  Great 


OF  COOPERATION  51 

Britain  and   the  United  States  ?  What 
limits  to  the  frightfulness  yet  to  be  dis- 
covered by  chemist  and  bacteriologist? 
What   guarantee   against   the   insidious 
growth  of  a  militarist  attitude  even  in 
democratically   minded  peoples   if  the 
constant   terror  of  war  exalts  military 
preparations  to  the  supreme  place  ?  Some- 
thing has  changed  the  Germany  of  other 
days  which  many  of  us  loved  even  while 
we  shrank  from  its  militarist  masters. 
Is  it  absolutely  certain  that  nothing  can 
change  the  spirit  of  democratic  peoples  ? 
At  any  rate,  America,  which  has  experi-  | 
mented  on  a  larger  scale  with  coopera-  \f<^ 
tion  —  political,  economic,  and  religious  ,' 
—  than  any  other  continent,  may  well  • 
assert  steadily  and  insistently  that  this  is 


f! 


52  THE  ETHICS 

the  more  hopeful  path.   It  may  urge  this 

upon  distrustful  Europe. 

The  obstacles  to  cooperation  are  : 

1.  The  sjurvival  of  the  principle  of 
dominance,  showing  itself  in  desire  for 
political  power  and  prestige,  and  in  cer- 
tain conceptions  of  national  honor. 

2.  The  principle  of  non-social  com- 
petition, exhibited  in  part  in  the  political 
policy  of  eliminating  weaker  peoples,  and 
conspicuously  in  foreign  trade  when  the 
useof  unfair  methods  relies  upon  national 
power  to  back  up  its  exploitation  or  mo- 
nopoly. 

3.  The  principle  of  nationalistic  sen- 
timent, itself  based  on  cooperation,  on 
social  tradition  and  common  ideals,  but 
bound  up  so  closely  with  political  sov- 


OF  COOPERATION  53 

ereignty  and  antagonisms  as  to  become 
exclusive  instead  of  cooperative  in  its  at- 
titude toward  other  cultures. 

The  principle  of  dominance  deters 
from  cooperation,  not  only  the  people 
that  seeks  to  dominate,  but  peoples  that 
fear  to  be  dominated  or  to  become  in- 
volved in  entangling  alliances.  Doubtless 
a  policy  of  aloofness  was  long  the  safe  : 
policy  for  us.  We  could  not  trust  po- 
litical liberty  to  an  alliance  with  mon- 
archies, even  as  with  equal  right  some ' 
European  peoples  might  distrust  the  pol- 
icies of  a  republic  seemingly  controlled 
by  the  slavery  interest.  At  the  present 
time  one  great  power  professes  itself  in- 
credulous of  the  fairness  of  any  world 
tribunal ;  smaller  powers  fear  the  com- 


54  THE  ETHICS 

manding  influence  of  the  great ;  new 
national  groups  just  struggling  to  ex- 
pression fear  that  a  league  of  nations 
would  be  based  on  present  status  and 
therefore  give  them  no  recognition,  or 
else  a  measure  of  recognition  conditioned 
by  past  injustices  rather  than  by  future 
aspirations  and  real  desert.  All  these  fears 
are  justified  in  so  far  as  the  principle 
of  dominance  is  still  potent.  The  only 
league  that  can  be  trusted  by  peoples 
willing  to  live  and  let  live,  is  one  that  is 
controlled  by  a  cooperative  spirit.  And 
yet  who  can  doubt  that  this  spirit  is 
spreading?  Few  governments  are  now 
organized  on  the  avowed  basis  that  mili- 
tary power,  which  embodies  the  spirit  of 
dominance,  should  be  superior  to  civil 


OF  COOPERATION  *^  '^  '^'^  ' 

control,  and  even  with  them  the  prin- 
ciple of  irresponsible  rule,  despite  its  re- 
inforcement by  military  success,  is  likely 
to  yield  to  the  spirit  of  the  age  when  once 
the  pressure  of  war  is  removed  which 
now  holds  former  protesters  against  mili- 
tarism solid  in  its  support.  For  all  powers 
that  are  genuine  in  their  desire  for  co- 
operation there  is  overwhelming  reason 
to  try  it ;  for  only  by  the  combined 
strength  of  those  who  accept  this  prin- 
ciple can  liberty  and  justice  be  main- 
tained against  the  aggression  of  powers 
capable  of  concentrating  all  their  re- 
sources with  a  suddenness  and  ruthless- 
ness  in  which  dominance  is  probably  su^ 
perior. 

Yet   cooperation   for  protection   of 


56  THE  ETHICS 

liberty  and  justice  is  liable  to  fall  short 
of  humanity's  hopes  unless  liberty  and 
justice  be  themselves  defined  in  a  co- 
operative sense.  The  great  liberties  which 
man  has  gained,  as  step  by  step  he  has 
risen  from  savagery,  have  not  been  chiefly 
the  assertion  of  already  existing  powers 
or  the  striking-ofFof  fetters  forged  by  his 
fellows.  They  have  been  additions  to 
previous  powers.  Science,  art,  inven- 
tion, associated  life  in  all  its  forms,  have 
opened  the  windows  of  his  dwelling, 
have  given  possibilities  to  his  choice, 
have  given  the  dream  and  the  interpre- 
tation which  have  set  him  free  from  his 
prison.  The  liberty  to  which  interna- 
tional cooperation  points  is  not  merely 
self-direction  or  self-determination,  but 


f     '^OF  COOPERATION^  x^^-i^  ^ 

a  larger  freedom  from  fear,  a  larger  free-* 
dom  from  suspicion,  a  fuller  control  over 
nature  and  society,  a  new  set  of  ideas, 
which  will  make  men  free  in  a  far  larger 
degree  than  ever  before. 

Similarly  justice  needs  to  be  cooper-     '/ 
atively    defined.    A  justice    that   looks     "" 
merely  to  existing  status  will  not  give 
lasting  peace.   Peoples  change  in  needs 
as  truly  as  they  differ  in  needs.  But  no^ 
people  can  be  trusted  to  judge  its  own 
needs  any  more  than  to  judge  its  own 
right.  A  justice  which  adheres  rigidly 
to  vested  interests,  and  a  justice  which 
is  based  on  expanding  interests,  are  likely  , 
to  be  deadlocked  unless  a  constructive 
spirit  is  brought  to  bear.  Abstract  rights 
to  the  soil,  to  trade,  to  expansion,  must 


58  THE  ETHICS 

be  subordinate  to  the  supreme  question : 
How  can  peoples  live  together  and  help 
instead  of  destroy?  This  can  be  ap- 
proached only  from  an  international 
point  of  view. 

The  second  obstacle,  unsocial  com- 
petition, is  for  trade  what  dominance  is 
in  politics.  It  prevents  that  solution  for 
many  of  the  delicate  problems  of  inter- 
national life  which  cooperation  through 
trade  might  otherwise  afford.  Exchange 
of  goods  and  services  by  voluntary  trade 
accomplishes  what  once  seemed  attain- 
able only  by  conquest  or  slavery.  If  Ger- 
many or  Japan  or  Italy  needs  iron  or 
coal ;  if  England  needs  wheat,  or  if  the 
United  States  sugar,  it  is  possible,  or 
should  be  possible,  to  obtain  these  with- 


OF  COOPERATION  59 

out  owning  the  country  in  which  are 
the  mines,  grain,  and  sugar  cane.  The 
United  States  needs  Canada's  products ; 
it  has  no  desire  to  own  Canada.  But  in 
recent  years  the  exchange  of  products 
has  been  subjected  to  a  new  influence. 
National  self-interest  has  been  added  to 
private  self-interest.  This  has  intensified 
and  called  out  many  of  the  worst  fea-  [ 
tures  of  antagonism  and  inequality. 

Few  in  this  country  have  realized  the 
extent  to  which  other  countries  have 
organized  their  foreign  commerce  on  na- 
tional lines.  We  are  now  becoming  in- 
formed as  to  the  carefully  worked-out 
programmes  of  commercial  education, 
merchant  marines,  trade  agreements, 
consular  service,  financial  and  moral  sup- 


6o  THE  ETHICS 

port  from  the  home  government,  and 
mutual  aid  among  various  salesmen  of 
the  same  nationality  living  in  a  foreign 
country.  We  are  preparing  to  undertake 
similar  enterprises.  We  are  reminded 
that  "eighty  per  cent  of  the  world's 
people  live  in  the  countries  bordering 
on  the  Pacific  Ocean,  and  that  as  a  re- 
sult of  the  rearrangement  of  trade  routes, 
San  Francisco's  chance  of  becoming  the 
greatest  distributing  port  of  the  Pacific 
for  goods  en  route  to  the  markets  of  the 
Orient,  are  now^  more  promising  than 
ever  before."  Can  the  United  States  take 
part  in  this  commerce  in  such  a  way  as 
to  help,  not  hinder,  international  prog- 
ress in  harmony?  Not  unless  we  re- 
member   that   commerce    may    be    as 


OF  COOPERATION  6i 

predatory  as  armies,  and  that  we  must 
provide  international  guarantees  against 
the  exclusive  types  of  competition  which 
we  have  had  to  control  by  law  in  our 
own  domestic  affairs.  An  Indian  or  an 
African  may  be  deprived  of  his  posses- 
sions quite  as  effectively  by  trade  as  by 
violence.  We  need  at  least  as  high  stand- 
ards of  social  welfare  as  in  domestic 
commerce.  I  cannot  better  present  the 
situation  than  by  quoting  from  a  recent 
article  by  Mr.  William  Notz  in  the 
"Journal  of  Political  Economy"  (Feb. 
1918): 

During  the  past  twenty-five  years  competi- 
tion in  the  world  markets  became  enormously 
keen.  In  the  wild  scramble  for  trade  the 
standards  of  honest  business  were  disregarded 
more  and  more  by  all  the  various  rival  na- 


62  THE  ETHICS 

tions.  In  the  absence  of  any  special  regulation 
or  legislation,  it  appeared  as  though  a  silent 
understanding  prevailed  in  wide  circles  that 
foreign  trade  was  subject  to  a  code  of  busi- 
ness ethics  widely  at  variance  with  the  rules  ob- 
served in  domestic  trade.  What  was  frowned 
upon  as  unethical  and  poor  business  policy, 
(if  not  illegal  at  home,  was  condoned  and 
,  winked  at  or  openly  espoused  when  foreign 
I  markets  formed  the  basis  of  operations  and 
foreigners  were  the  competitors.  High-minded 
men  of  all  nations  have  long  observed  with 
concern  the  growing  tendency  of  modern  in- 
ternational trade  toward  selfish  exploitation, 
concession-hunting,  cut-throat  competition, 
and  commercialistic  practices  of  the  most  sor- 
did type.  Time  and  again  complaints  have 
been  voiced,  retaliatory  measures  threatened, 
and  more  than  once  serious  friction  has  en- 
sued. 

Mr.  Notz  brings  to  our  attention  va- 
rious efforts  by  official  and  commercial 


OF  COOPERATION  63 

bodies  looking  toward  remedies  for  such 
conditions  and  toward  official  recogni- 
tion by  all  countries  of  unfair  competi- 
tion as  a  penal  offense. 

What  more  do  we  need  than  fair| 
competition  to  constitute  the  coopera- 
tive  international  life  which  we  dreamed  \ 
yesterday  and  now  must  consider,  not  i 
merely  as  a  dream,  but  as  the  only  | 
alternative  to  a  future  of  horror  ? 

Free  trade  has  been  not  unnaturally  / 
urged  as  at  least  one  condition.  Tariffs 
certainly  isolate.  To  say  to  a  country : 
"  You  shall  manufacture  nothing  unless 
you  own  the  raw  material;  you  shall 
sell  nothing  unless  at  prices  which  I 
fix,"  is  likely  to  provoke  the  reply: 
"  Then  I  must  acquire  lands  in  which 


64  THE  ETHICS 

raw  materials  are  found;  I  must  ac- 
quire colonies  which  will  buy  my  prod- 
ucts." Trade  agreements  mean  cooper- 
ation for  those  within,  unless  they  are 
one-sided  and  made  under  duress;  in 
any  case  they  are  exclusive  of  those 
without.    Free   trade,   the   open   door, 

[seems  to  offer  a  better  way.  But  free 
trade  in  name  is  not  free  trade  unl^s 
the  parties  are  really  free  —  free  from 
ignorance,  from   pressure  of  want.   If 

I  one  party  is  weak  and  the  other  unscru- 
pulous; if  one  competitor  has  a  lower 
standard  of  living  than  the  other,  free- 
dom of  trade  will  not  mean  genuine  co- 
operation. Such  cooperation  as  means 
good  for  all  requires  either  an  equality 
of  conditions  between  traders  and  labor- 


OF  COOPERATION  6j 

ers  of  competing  nations  and  of  nations  y 
which  exchange  goods,  or  else  an  in-  | 
ternational    control    to    prevent    unfair  • 
competition,  exploitation  of  weaker  peo-  ', 
pies,  and  lowering  of  standards  of  liv- 
ing.  Medical  science  is  giving:  an  ob- 
ject   lesson    which    may   well   have   a 
wide  application.    It  is  seeking  to  com- 
bat disease  in   its  centers  of  diffusion. 
Instead    of   attempting    to    quarantine 
against  the  Orient,  it  is  aiding  the  Ori- 
ent to  overcome  those  conditions  which 
do  harm  alike  to  Orient  and  Occident. 
Plague,  anthrax,   yellow  fever,  cannot 
exist  in  one  country  without  harm  to 
all.  Nor  in  the  long  run  can  men  reach 
true  cooperation  so  long  as  China  and 
Africa  are    a    prize    for    the   exploiter 


66  THE  ETHICS 

rather  than  equals  in  the  market.  Not 
merely  in  the  political  sense,  but  in  its 
larger  meanings  democracy  here  is  not 
safe  without  democracy  there.  Educa- 
tion, and  the  lifting  of  all  to  a  higher 
level,  is  the  ultimate  goal.  And  until 
education,  invention,  and  intercommu- 
nication have  done  their  work  of  eleva- 
tion, international  control  must  protect 
and  regulate. 

In  many  respects  the  obstacle  to  in- 
ternational cooperation  which  is  most 
difficult  to  remove  is  the  strong  and  still 
growing  sentiment  of  nationality.  This 
is  not,  like  dominance,  a  waning  sur- 
vival of  a  cruder  method  of  social  order; 
it  is  a  genuine  type  of  cooperation. 
Rooted  as  it  is  in   a   historic  past,  in 


OF  COOPERATION  67 

community  of  ideals  and  traditions,  and 
usually  of  language  and  art,  it  wakens 
the  emotional  response  to  a  degree  once 
true  only  of  religion.    Born  of  such  a  ) 
social  tradition,  the  modern  may  be  said 
in  truth  mentally  and  spiritually,  as  well  I 
as  physically,  to  be  born  a  Frenchman  1 
or  a  German,  a  Scotchman  or  Irishman  | 
or  Englishman.    He  may  be  content  to 
merge  this  inheritance  in  an  empire  if 
he  can  be  senior  partner,  but  the  strug- 
gles of  Irish,  Poles,  Czechs,  and  South 
Slavs,  the  Zionist   movement,  the  na- 
tionalistic stirrings  in  India,  with  their 
literary  revivals,   their  fierce  self-asser- 
tions, seem  to  point  away  from  inter- 
nationalism rather  than  toward  it.   The 
Balkans,  in  which  Serb,  Bulgar,  Rou- 


68  THE  ETHICS 

manian,  and  Greek  have  been  develop- 
ing this  national  consciousness,  have 
been  the  despair  of  peacemakers. 

The  strongest  point  in  the  nationalist 
programme  is,  however,  not  in  any  wise 
opposed  to  cooperation,  but  rather  to 
dominance  or  non-social  competition. 
,tL.  The  strongest  point  is  the  importance 
l^  of  diversity  combined  with  group  unity 
for  the  fullest  enrichment  of  life^nd 
the  widest  development  of  human  ca- 
pacity. A  world  all  of  one  sort  would 
not  only  be  less  interesting,  but  less 
progressive.  We  are  stimulated  by  dif- 
ferent customs,  temperaments,  arts,  and 
ideals.  But  all  this  is  the  strongest  argu- 
ment for  genuine  cooperation,  since  by 
this  only  can  diversity  be  helpful,  even 


OF  COOPERATION  69 

as  it  is  only  through  diversity  in  its 
members  that  a  community  can  de- 
velop fullest  life.  A  world  organization i) 
based  on  the  principle  that  any  single 
group  is  best  and  therefore  ought  to 
rule,  or  to  displace  all  others,  would  be, 
a  calamity.  A  world  organization  which 
encourages  every  member  to  be  itself 
would  be  a  blessing. 

Why  do  nationalism  and  internation* 
alism  clash  ?  Because  this  national  spirit 
has  rightly  or  wrongly,  been  bound  up 
so  intimately  with  political  independ- 
encg.  Tara'sharp  long  hangs  mute  when 
Erin  is  conquered.  Poland's  children 
must  not  use  a  language  in  which  they 
might  learn  to  plot  against  their  masters. 
A  French-speaking  Alsatian  is  suspected 


70  THE  ETHICS 

of  disloyalty.  Professor  Dewey  has  re- 
cently pointed  out  that  in_the_United 
States  we  have  gone  far  toward  separating 
culture  from  the  state,  and  suggests  that 
this  may  be  the  path  of  peace  for  Europe. 
We  allow  groups  to  keep  their  religion, 
their  language,  their  song  festivals.  It 
may  perhaps  be  claimed  that  this  main- 
tenance of  distinct  languages  and  sepa- 
rate cultures  is  a  source  of  weakness  in 
such  a  crisis  as  we  now  face.  Yet  it  may 
well  be  urged,  on  the  other  hand,  that  a 
policy  less  liberal  would  have  increased 
rather  than  diminished  disunion  and  dis- 
loyalty. 

VI 

The  student   of  human    progress  is 
likely  to  be  increasingly  impressed  with 


OF  COOPERATION  71 

the  interaction  between  ideas  and  insti- 
tutions. How  far  does  man  build  and|  ^ 
shape   institutions  to  give  body  to  his      *\ 
ideas  ?    How  far  is  it  the  organized  life '  'k^ 
with  its  social  contacts,  its  give  and  take,    iL 
its  enlargement  of  its  membership  to  see  \ 
life  sub  specie  commufiitatis,  which  itself  [ 
brings  ideas  to  birth?  Desire  may  bring 
the  sexes  together,  but  it  is  the  associa- 
tion and  organized  relationships  of  the 
family  which  transform  casual  to  per- 
manent affection  and  shape  our  concep- 
tions of  its  values.  A  herding  instinct  or 
a  common  need  of 'defense  or  of  food 
supplies  may  bring  together  early  groups, 
and  will  to  power  may  begin  the  state, 
but  it  is  the  living  together  which  gen- 
erates laws  and  wakens  the  craving  for 


74  THE  ETHICS 

liberty  and  the  struggle  for  justice.  Seer 
and  poet  doubtless  contribute  to  prog- 
ress by  their  kindling  appeals  to  the  im- 
agination and  sympathy ;  the  philosopher 
may,  as  Plato  claimed  for  him,  live  as 
citizen  of  a  perfect  state  which  has  no 
earthly  being,  and  shape  his  life  accord- 
ing to  its  laws ;  but  mankind  in  general 
has  learned  law  and  right,  as  well  as  the 
arts  of  use  and  beauty,  in  the  school  of 
life  in  common. 

So  it  is  likely  to  be  with  international 
cooperation.  Fears  and  hopes  now  urge 
it  upon  a  reluctant,  incredulous  world. 
But  the  beginnings  —  scientific,  legal, 
commercial,  political — timid  and  im- 
perfect though  they  be,  like  our  own 
early  confederation,  will  work  to  reshape 


OF  COOPERATION  73 

those  who  take  part.  Mutual  under- 
standing will  increase  with  common  ac- 
tion. When  men  work  consistently  to 
create  new  resources  instead  of  treating 
their  world  as  a  fixed  system,  when  they 
see  it  as  a  fountain,  not  as  a  cistern,  they 
will  gradually  gain  a  new  spirit.  The  I 
Great  Community  must  create  as  well  as 
prove  the  ethics  of  cooperation.  ' 


CAMBRIDGE  .  MASSACHUSETTS 
U   .   S   .  A 


^^<^^^ 


-mmims//. 


^10SANCFI% 

8  ^^ — ^^ 


o 
.^WEUNIVERS/A. 


A^-lOSMElf/^, 

o 


5 


^TiijoNvsoi^      %a3AiN[i-3WV^        >&AJivaaii#      ^om 


<^'mmoA^ 


^lllBRARYO^ 


^<i/0JllV3J0^ 
^OFCAllFORi^ 


>&Aavaanis^ 


^0FCAIIF0% 

>     V/   _   f  ^ 


,^WEUNIVER% 


aweuniverva 


<^130NYS01^ 


^5MEUNIVER%       ^lOSANCEier^ 


^TiijoNYsov^      "^AaaAiNnjwv 


,^WEUNIVER% 

>- 


^lOSANCEl£r> 

o 


^^^l•lIBRARYacJ 


,^V\E•UNIVER% 


'^J'ilJDNVSOl^ 


1^ 


^     5V<i^-— 


> 


^<!/ojnv}jo^ 


'^<tfOJm 


aMEUNIVERS/a 


-    ■  ^   o 


-j^HIBRARYO^^ 


^lOSAHCElfj^ 

o 


^OFCAllFOff^      ^OFCAl 


%0JIW3JO>' 


^-sojiivDJo^      ^j:?idkvsoi^' 


^vi.OFCAllFOfti^ 


^OFCAIIFO/?^         ^5jrtEl)NlVER% 


^^AUVyaiH^  <ril30NVS01=^ 


"^Aa^Ai 


aWEUNIVERS//- 


^lOSANCEl^^ 


E     :5 


<ril30NVSO)^ 


"^/iaaAiNH-aw^^ 


^£llBRARYOr^ 


^^^UIBR 


^.!/ojiiv3jo>'     '^mw 


^ 

^ 

«< 


5MEIIN1VERS//) 


.J 


^lOSANCEl^^ 

o 


^OFCAUFORi^      ^OFCA 


